JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)May 17, 2000

A- de 2000

The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.

Reporting justice Alvaro Tafur Galvis

✓Claimant Jesus Alberto Rojas Sanin

✓
Topic · hard data
Solicitud De Aclaracion De La Sentencia C-067 De 1999
01

Topics and subtopics of the ruling

✓What the ruling decides and analyzes, as indexed by the Court's case-law reporter's office. Each topic links to every decision that addresses it.

Corte Constitucional
  • Incompetencia para inmiscuirse en interpretaciones hechas sobre lo resuelto en fallos
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se rechazó por improcedente la solicitud formulada por el ciudadano de la referencia, para que se aclare la Sentencia C-067/99, toda vez que en virtud de lo dispuesto en el Art. 49 del Decreto 2067 de 1991, según el cual contra las sentencias de la Corte Constitucional no procede recurso alguno, ha manifestado reiteradamente que no caben aclaraciones ni revisiones de sus fallos, salvo en casos señalados por su reiterada jurisprudencia.

En el presente caso, el solicitante pretende que la Corte se pronuncie sobre la interpretación de su propio fallo, cuando esta Corporación efectuó un análisis a la totalidad del inciso primero del Art. 1o. de la Ley 445 de 1998.

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
02

What it decided

This decision records no constitutional review holdings. This is common in tutela rulings and orders, where the decision does not concern a legal provision.
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

  1. En merito de lo expuesto, la Corte Constitucional,
  2. RESUELVE:
  3. RECHAZASE por improcedente la solicitud formulada por el ciudadano Jesus Alberto Rojas Sanin, para que se aclare la sentencia C-067 del 10 de febrero de 1999.
Verbatim text · source: operative part of the ruling
03

The bench that decided

We distinguish who appears in the ruling (signature, vote or concurrence) from who probably sat on the Court on that date. The difference is shown by color and shape.

04

How it connects

Each decision is a node in the case-law network: it cites some and is cited by others. Follow the threads.

The document’s networkthe most influential links · node size is how often the Court cites it
constitutional review unification tutela

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.